Use of DNA in Criminal Investigation

Crime Scene Analysis

The case study presents a homicide incident, which occurred at 9170 Old Annapolis Road Columbia. The victim was Ashley Nicole Smith, and the investigations identified two suspects who were Scott Jory Jones, and Frederick James Johnson. This case involves a series of events in the efforts to bring the involved into justice. This case study presents an actual case, but the case study does not use the actual names for protection purposes. It was on 11/3/00 when two truck drivers while making a U-turn saw fresh blood. On close observation, the truck drivers saw the victim's body and notified the police (VCUIR, 2000).

The police responded, and on the scene of the crime, police noted that the victim (Ashley Nicole Smith) was dead. The efforts of identifying the victim were futile. However, scene technicians, forensic experts and other crime experts were in a position to collect substantial evidence. Police conducted several searches from high school databases, primarily because the dead victim was a young girl. Therefore, it was conclusive that she was a high school student, which helped police to identify Ashley Nicole Smith (VCUIR, 2000).

In the course of the investigations, police were told that a vehicle, with tinted windows, occupied by two black males was seen speeding through the intersection of Bendix Road and Old Annapolis Road. Autopsy on the victim's body made it clear that the victim sustained 34 stabs, and strangulation. Police continued holding interviews with the mother's victim, friends and acquaintances. There was an $8,000 reward, made public for information that would lead to potential arrests of suspects. Through phone calls, the police were able to establish a link between Ashley, and Scott Jones (VCUIR, 2000).

Further investigation found crucial evidence that linked Scott Jones and Frederick Johnson to the homicide incident; hence, police obtained search warrants. Subsequent interviews on Scott Jones made it apparent that he had knowledge about the homicide incident. He had provided information, which was consistent with his "story" but later on provided contradictory information. Although he was attempting to shield Frederick Johnson, he could not do it any longer, especially when police made him aware that Johnson had provided information in relation to the incident (VCUIR, 2000).

Therefore, Scott Jones had no option, but to own up. He was still reluctant, but several interviews, made him own up. Scott Jones, later on, tried to blame his friend, Frederick Johnson for the murder of Ashley Nicole Smith, but compelling evidence would not allow. On the other hand, police were able to locate Johnson using the warrants. Blood and hair collected from Frederick Johnson matched with the evidence collected in the crime scene, which earned him 1st Degree murder charge. Similar, Scott Jones was charged with 1st Degree Murder (VCUIR, 2000).

Purpose of this Paper

This paper uses the provided case study, on the incident of homicide involving the victim (Ashley Nicole Smith), and the identified suspects (Scott Jones and Frederick Johnson), to provide an analysis of the crime scene investigation, and evidence. The paper will also discuss the interviews conducted on the witnesses and suspects (Scott Jones and Frederick Johnson), investigative steps, suspect interrogations, constitutional challenges and a comparison of the applied strategies in relation to class teachings. In addition, this paper, through the case study provides an application of theory in practice.

Crime Scene and Evidence Analysis

Police got information concerning the homicide incident and responded appropriately. In this context, several experts arrive on the scene of the crime such as the main investigator, secondary investigators, CID supervisor, Crime Lab Technician, reporting persons, forensic experts, patrol units and mobile command post. This action shows compliance to the crime-scene investigation protocol (Walton, 2013). In addition, the patrol response first went to identify whether the reported case was true, which they affirmed and proceeded to protect the crime scene using a crime scene perimeter. In addition, present experts helped in the collection of samples from the victim.

This included samples such as DNA, from both the victim, and others that could lead to arrests of the suspects. In this incident, the search for any physical evidence was futile, but there was substantial trace evidence on the victim's bare body. From the analysis of the scene of crime, it is apparent that the crime scene investigation is a dynamic process. It follows a systematic procedure in the attempt to provide the happenings in the scene during crime (Miller, 2003). The primary investigator is seen collaborating with the other investigators in an effort to identify, and provide a reconstruction of the scene.

Effort to identify the victim were futile because the victim's body was covered with blood; however, forensic experts collected DNA samples (Schroeder and White, 2009), and police further conducted database searches in high schools. In addition, the first responders to the scene conducted a survey. This involved a walk through, which would help in identifying other potential evidence. It is important to note the current weather conditions as they can interfere with the evidence. On the other hand, the police took photos of the victim, especially showing the stabs and photos of the scene of the crime (Miller, 2003).

Evidence Analysis: Knife, DNA

Apparently, the effort to identify potential physical evidence was not a success. Police conducted a thorough search of the scene, which complies with the investigation protocol. Even though police were not able to gather physical evidence, they were able, through forensic experts to collect scientific evidence, which included DNA samples from the scene. The police also took a sketch of the scene, photo, and photo of the victim and subsequent description, which helped in the progress of the investigations. In this case, the utilization of forensic experts complies with the concept that every contact leaves potential trace, which can help in investigations (Schroeder and White, 2009).

Apparently, the case presents a homicide, and this leaves the law enforcement no evidence, except the DNA samples, and physical evidence. However, it was hard to obtain physical evidence, even after a thorough search of the scene of the crime. This left the law officers to collect the DNA samples, and it was constitutional. Therefore, the defense had no right to suppress such substantial evidence. On the other hand, it is in accordance with the investigation protocol. Therefore, collection of DNA, as potential evidence, was not a breach of human rights (Schroeder and White, 2009).

On the other hand, a witness collects the knife, which later on becomes a piece of evidence. The knife was around the scene of the crime, which makes it potential evidence. The defense could not also suppress this piece of evidence. In fact, the knife had bloodstain, and the witness who forwarded it to the police, had his DNA sample checked, and cleared. In the case of the knife, one can see Scott Jones giving a description that matched the knife in question. Furthermore, during the interview of Scott's mother and sister, his sister suggested he had seen Scott purchase the knife at the flea market.

Therefore, the knife was acquired legally, and the defense could not suppress such crucial evidence. In cases of homicide, DNA samples are the main sources of evidence. This was apparent because, after surveillance, and collection of the suspect's cigarettes, the DNA samples matched those collected at the crime scene. Owing to their vital role in the case, the knife and DNA samples qualify as evidence, collected legally, and the defense had no right to suppress them (Schroeder and White, 2009).

Steps in Homicide Investigations

Strategies and Steps

The police use interviewing, and re-interviewing as the main approach to investigate the presented homicide case. The first interview, aimed at identifying the victim's body, which the police conducted with the victim's mother. Apparently, the interview on the victim's best friend, gave some insight whereby the two had an interest on the same male friend. This interview gave police information because it led to the introduction of "Jay" who was one of the suspects. This helped the police in identifying other suspects, associates of the potential suspect (Walton, 2013).

In addition, it helped in revealing the factors that may have led to the killing of the victim. Police also conducted a field search on the roads adjacent to the crime scene. This aims at collecting any other evidence, which police may have omitted, or identification of witnesses who might have information concerning the case. The strategy could also lead to identification of suspects; this assumes that a suspect might check the crime scene, and coincidentally, police bump on them (Miller, 2003). In their field search, police were able to recover potential evidence, which was a knife on Bendix Road.

The knife had dried bloodstain, which contributed greatly to the case. Police further conducted interviews, but this time used questions, which helped them, note the change of tone, or body language of the interviewee (Miller, 2003). Police went further to offer an $8,000 reward, on information concerning the case. The information should provide a lead to help police to make arrests, or get to potential suspects. Through this strategy, police were able to obtain leads, although some were not valuable, the police identified three leads from different places, which connected to the case.

After identification of the suspects, police used surveillance, which helped in the collection of Scott's cigarettes for DNA evaluation (Schroeder and Whiter, 2009). Police followed this strategy and applied it on the other potential suspect, Frederick Johnson. In another incidence of surveillance, police recognized the vehicle, which witnesses had seen speeding around the scene of the crime. On a traffic stop, police recognized Scott Jones as the driver, and the other occupant was Frederick James Johnson. Further checks suggest that the two had prior cases of delinquent behaviors, which the police used at their advantage.

Interviews with Witnesses

The first witness in this case was Ashley's mother. Apparently, the two had problems, but after making up, they spend the night of 11/2/00 talking. The mother, however, realized that Ashley was not home in the morning of 11/3/00. This interview led to the identification of other witness, Heather Thomas, Ashley's best friend. Mrs. Smith, Ashley's mother strongly believed that this friend would offer substantial help in the ongoing investigations (VCUIR, 2000). Mrs. Smith identified other witnesses, such as Patrick O'Donnell, Jason Adams, Robert More' and "Gabe." Mrs. Smith revealed that Ashley Smith was behaving badly, and she restricted her from using the phone.

During Heather's interview, Heather broke into tears even before she was told that her friend was found dead. During the second interview, she cried but could not offer a reason for this behavior. Apparently, it was postulated that the two liked the same person, but Heather denied being jealous of her friend. Mrs. Smith had identified "Jay" and the police wanted to know whether Heather Thomas knew this person. Heather Thomas, had some information on the person, and she provided helpful information to the ongoing case. Subsequent interviews in the victim's school did not offer helpful information, as they were central to rumors (VCUIR, 2000).

Jason Phelps, who was the boyfriend to Ashley, voluntarily appeared in the police station. He takes the polygraph examination and offers to help the police with the investigations. Jason kept on stating that he did not take part in Ashley's death. At some point, Jason could not take it, and opted to go home. However, he signed consent for a search at his home. On the other hand, Ashley's psychotherapist reveals that Ashley was impulsive, "fighter," had anger management problem, poor relationship with father and had a learning disability. A third interview with Heather Thomas did not lead to anything substantial.

Summary of Findings

Interviewing witnesses is a crucial factor in homicide investigations. In prior cases, studies have suggested that some witnesses, through the information they offer, turn out to be potential suspects. This case presents officials with proficient interviewing skills, primarily due to the substantial leads they got from a single interview (Miller, 2003). As required by law, the witnesses, even those that could be potential suspects offered information voluntarily (Walton, 2013). This was the case of Jason, and Heather Thomas. In this context, Jason contributed in adding evidence, although his lacked a link to the crime, Heather Thomas gave names, for instance, "Jay" who later turned out as the prime suspect, and Mrs. Smith also gave names, such as Heather Thomas, who contributed to the investigation (VCUIR, 2000).

Interrogation of Suspects

Confession of Scott Jones

The interrogation of Scott Jones followed a deceptive approach, in that, he was not aware of Johnson's involvement. The case did opted not to advise him that he was a prime suspect, rather the case suggested that he was assisting, by providing information he might have heard concerning the case. The office was monitoring the interrogation, and subsequently recording the information (Constanzo and Leo, 2007). After a series of questions, it is apparent that the case applied the tactic of investigating in the process of interviewing. This is evident in the situation where the suspect goes deep and suggests that Ashley had stabs on the stomach while this was not public.

On the other hand, it is evident that although the suspect claims his mother told him, an interview with the mother suggests otherwise. The case also applies the confrontation approach in some instances. For example, the case suggests that samples of blood from him and his Ford were in for trace evidence. On hearing this, Scott Jones offers to tell the whole truth, although he had earlier denied having the victim on his vehicle, he later confirms that Ashley had been in his Ford, but not the night before she died. Owing to this confrontation, Jones later suggested that Johnson, his friend, might have taken part in the murder (Constanzo and Leo, 2007).

This is contradictory, because, earlier on, one can see Scott Jones protecting his friend suggesting he was quiet, and avoided getting into trouble. During the second interrogation, Scott Jones suggested that whatever he had said earlier was the truth. However, after a series of questions, he offers contradicting statements (Walton, 2013). Again, one can see the case utilizing deception, in that, Scott Jones becomes curious to know what information Frederick Johnson had given. Therefore, the case suggested that everything was consistent, but the roles, as suggested by Frederick, lacked consistency.